Guessing is not a strategy: How to build decision velocity with AI and real-time data
June 10, 2026 | Live Webinar
Viewing Posts by Lynda Bourne
Stakeholder Perceptions Are Paramount
| One of the first things salespeople learn is that perceptions are reality. And the same goes for project managers. Your perceptions and your reality may differ, but if you want to communicate effectively with someone you need to understand their version of the truth. Perceptions are also closely aligned with expectations. If a stakeholder perceives an organization as unresponsive and inefficient they will expect bad service. From this starting point, the stakeholder will readily accept as true every experience that contradicts their view of the world. A good experience can be written off as "the exception that proves the rule." This presents a distinct challenge to project managers who are developing a communication plan. Your stakeholder's perceptions of project management will be based on prior experience with other projects in other times and even other organizations. This is neither fair nor reasonable but it is a fact! The situation is made worse by another trait: our tendency to feel and remember bad experiences more strongly than good ones. Where negative attitudes occur, your solution is basically hard work. You need to assess the current attitude of your key stakeholders, determine the optimum attitude and then work to improve the stakeholder's perceptions of your project. There are three key elements to consider when working to change poor perceptions. 1. Build rapport and open communication channels that will be effective. You may need help from supportive stakeholders to achieve this. 2. Build your credibility by providing accurate, timely and useful information that precisely meets the needs of the stakeholder. Help them to be successful. 3. Whenever possible, differentiate your current project from the person's previous negative experiences. The bad news is one slip and you immediately reinforce the old perceptions. So stay focused and ensure every communication, authentic and credible. |
Putting the PMBOK® Guide in a Cultural Context
Categories:
PMI
Categories: PMI
| A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) is developed by hundreds of volunteers to represent generally accepted good practices in project management. But is this enough? There are already extensions to the PMBOK®Guide for the construction industry and government that expand the basic framework to meet the needs of these sectors. Is there a need for extensions to meet the needs of different cultures? The value of diversity and the challenges of managing culturally diverse teams was the focus of Tom Sullivan's feature article "Common Ground" in the October issue of PM Network®. My column in the November edition of PM Network, "Culture Shock," highlights some contractual issues that impacted a major mine development. As projects and teams become more global, managing appropriately within and across cultural boundaries is a key project management skill. Although there's no right or wrong in culture, different societies resolve challenges in different ways and use very different structures to communicate information within businesses and projects. As PMI moves toward the start of the next PMBOK® Guide update project, I would like to take the opportunity to discuss issues and challenges of managing projects in a cultural context. Do we need cultural extensions to the PMBOK® Guide or is there more value in retaining it as a core definition of good practices that apply worldwide? I've had my say in PM Network, now it's your turn to weigh in. Over to you! |
The Origin of Stakeholders
Categories:
Teams
Categories: Teams
| Stakeholders must be important. A Guide to the
Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)--Fourth Edition has over
380 separate references to the word "stakeholder." But the thousands of managers struggling today to
meet stakeholder expectations may be interested to know that only a few years
ago no one bothered. The whole concept of business or project stakeholders
is a relatively new phenomenon. The
legal concept of a stakeholder is not new. Neither is the concept of "having a
stake" in something. One
must also presume the concept of delivering a quality product to meet the needs
of the end user, customer or client is not new. In
fact, many 19th century businesses had enviable reputations for customer
service. Which leads to the question: What changed? The
origin of a business stakeholder in management literature can be traced back to
1963, when the word appeared in an international memorandum at the Stanford
Research Institute. Stakeholders were defined as "those groups without whose
support the organization would cease to exist." The
concept of business stakeholders was also a core part of the work on systems
analysis in organizations conducted by researchers at the Tavistock Institute
in London, England in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The concept has since
grown from those beginnings. During
the last 30 years, the people and organizations covered by the term
"stakeholder" have continued to expand and evolve. Stakeholder theory now includes
the concepts of corporate social responsibility, organizational theory, systems
theory, customer relationship management and governance. And
in the last few years, stakeholders have come to encompass anyone with an
interest in or who is affected by the work of an organization or its
deliverables, or as someone who contributes to the work or its outcome. Now
that the idea of a stakeholder has come of age in the project world, the new
challenge is stakeholder relationship management maturity. Organizations that
develop this capability quickly are likely to have a significant competitive
advantage--at least until their competitors catch up. |
Ignore Stakeholders at Your Own Risk
| I've been discussing stakeholders and communication for some time now without focusing on the key question: Why do stakeholders matter? Well, on most projects, stakeholders equate to risks. There are a few risks that don't involve people--inclement weather, for example--but 90 percent of the risks on most projects are caused by one or more people: • Quality risks almost always occur because people do not follow or not understand processes. • Design risks are usually the result of people not communicating. • Time and cost risks typically tie back to the performance of people doing the work. • Even inclement weather is influenced by people's perceptions--what's deemed "too wet to work" in a temperate climate may be seen as okay in a tropical monsoon climate. People also determine if a risk is acceptable or not. Whether a risk is perceived as acceptable or not is 100 percent inside a person's mind. As project managers, our job is to reduce risks to a level that gives the project the best overall chance of success. Yet extreme risk aversion will kill a project more effectively than a gung-ho attitude. Of course, what constitutes a sensible level of risk is totally dependent on the perceptions and risk attitude of your key stakeholders. That's why a central part of effective stakeholder management is ascertaining the risk attitude of your stakeholders. And then you must either adapt the project to fit within these parameters or provide the necessary information to help the stakeholder change his or her perceptions of what is acceptable. The more that people feel they understand a situation, the more willing they are to accept risks. Similarly, if you have a trusting relationship with someone, you're more likely to rely on their capability to safely manage risks on your behalf. The most useful risk management strategy you can use on your project is effective stakeholder management supported by good communication. What has your experience been? |
Who is a Stakeholder?
Categories:
Communications Management
Categories: Communications Management
| Everyone is talking about stakeholders these days. Surprisingly, this has not always been the case. The modern concept of stakeholders seems to have emerged from the work of the Tavistock Institute in London, England in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Forty years later, the concept of stakeholder has expanded to include all of the people and organizations that have a real or perceived '"stake" in the project or its outcomes. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) breaks down a stakeholder as a person or organization that: • Is actively involved in the project • Has interests that may be positively or negatively affected by the performance or completion of the project • May exert influence over the project, its deliverables or its team members In my work on mapping and managing stakeholders, I have found it important to expand on this basic definition to understand the "stake" of the stakeholder. This helps determine the best way to engage with them. Here are some of the different stakes a person or organization may have (most have more than one): Interest: To be affected by a decision related to the work or its outcomes Rights: To be treated in a certain way or to have a particular right (including legal or moral) protected Ownership: To have a legal title to an asset or a property Knowledge: To possess specialist or organizational knowledge needed for the work Impact or influence: To be impacted by the work or its outcomes, or have the ability to impact (or influence) the execution of work or its outcomes Contribution: Relating to the support or assets including the supply of resources, the allocation of funding, or providing advocacy for the objectives of the project Once you understand the stake the stakeholder is seeking to protect, profit from or enhance, you can structure your communications to let the person know you understand their hopes or concerns. From this starting point, you're in a much better position to manage the relationship to the benefit of both the project and the stakeholder. |